ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ispcp]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ispcp] FW: [council] Current draft of Fadi's requested communication from council

  • To: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: [ispcp] FW: [council] Current draft of Fadi's requested communication from council
  • From: "Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx" <Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:09:49 +0100
  • List-id: ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Reply-to: "Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx" <Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'd like to put a short discussion about the letter annexed to the
agenda today.

Clearly BC and IPC are against sending this letter. There shall be a
last try to find a conclusion about. Fadi's deadline is end of Feb.

We should settle our position.

Regards

Wolf-Ulrich

-----Original Message-----
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 00:00:47 +0100
Subject: [council] Current draft of Fadi's requested communication from
council
From: Mason Cole <mcole@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx List" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Council colleagues --

As you know, Fadi requested of the council its input regarding the
strawman proposal resulting from the BC's and IPC's request for
additional RPMs in new gTLDs.  On December 27, I circulated an early
draft of a council reply.

The communication is due very shortly, and has been taken up by a small
group within the council to ensure that all points of view are
represented.  Because this is an agenda item for our meeting this week,
at Maria Farrell's helpful suggestion, I'm sending the current draft to
council so we can be prepared to discuss it then.  This draft does not
reflect additional input of the BC and IPC -- if this is provided prior
to the meeting, I'll be happy to forward it to the council.

Thanks --

Mason


Attachment: GNSO Reply to Chehade-draft 2.docx
Description: Microsoft Office





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>